I wonder if a ring tattoo would substitute for an actual metal in preventing the release of the floozie pheromone. And if it would, would one drawn on with an ink pen work just as well. I would think that both would cover up the "ringless floozie pheromone" gland and prevent future bouts of floozieness, but as far as I know no actual scientific testing has been done on this theory. Maybe we could get a grant.

I think pen ink has metal in it, and I'm pretty sure tattoo ink does also. Just in case, I'd use a pencil -graphite - for extra protection.

I wonder if a ring tattoo would substitute for an actual metal in preventing the release of the floozie pheromone. And if it would, would one drawn on with an ink pen work just as well. I would think that both would cover up the "ringless floozie pheromone" gland and prevent future bouts of floozieness, but as far as I know no actual scientific testing has been done on this theory. Maybe we could get a grant.

I think pen ink has metal in it, and I'm pretty sure tattoo ink does also. Just in case, I'd use a pencil -graphite - for extra protection.

If you do the experiment and research, let us know, please.

I wonder if it's the stone or lack thereof, though. I'm thinking that since men's rings don't often have stones, and men are not floozies when they don't wear rings, then it must be the stone. So women who have plain bands must be in trouble.

Isn't there a religion in the US that prohibits wearing jewelry, including wedding rings?

Most plain religions (Amish, Mennonite, Dunkard, Apostolic Christian, etc) take the Pauline text about 'not adorning yourself with gold' as a commandment that is still in force. Among the Dunkards, married men wear a different style of hat than bachelors, and they grow a full beard when their first child is born. However, there's no change in how a woman dresses when she marries; once you're of a certain age, you wear the prayer bonnet whether you're married or single.

I wonder if a ring tattoo would substitute for an actual metal in preventing the release of the floozie pheromone. And if it would, would one drawn on with an ink pen work just as well. I would think that both would cover up the "ringless floozie pheromone" gland and prevent future bouts of floozieness, but as far as I know no actual scientific testing has been done on this theory. Maybe we could get a grant.

I think pen ink has metal in it, and I'm pretty sure tattoo ink does also. Just in case, I'd use a pencil -graphite - for extra protection.

If you do the experiment and research, let us know, please.

I wonder if it's the stone or lack thereof, though. I'm thinking that since men's rings don't often have stones, and men are not floozies when they don't wear rings, then it must be the stone. So women who have plain bands must be in trouble.

See-this has items for study I had not thought of. And I would hate to write a grant proposal that was too narrow and did not allow for expansion of the testing. It is clearly an issue of national importance that requires a huge grant for study (I will humbly be willing to take a large salary to oversee the testing and release of the results). I think we, at a minimum, need a huge lab, several bio-chemists and biologists along with their grad students, volunteers to oversee the floozie recovery clinic that we will be creating, and nice glossy brochures explaining our efforts to protect the public from the floozie epidemic and how we are working to curb the bands of men roving about, drawn in by the floozie pheromone. Of course, we will need brave volunteers to allow us to test the floozie gland (either by going ringless or by removing their rings for short periods), along with a cross section of women who have tattooed rings, plastic rings, cigar band rings, and assorted other types of non-metallic rings in order to determine the best way to block the release of the floozie pheromone. We will also need to do some testing to determine if the floozie gland comes online at puberty, or at a later age. Also, at what age do boys start detecting and reacting to the floozie pheromone. Gosh-this could be a lifetime of work (and I need a job right now).

Logged

Lynn

"Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat." Robert A. Heinlein

Yeah, I've worked with lasers, and everyone in the lab was forbidden to wear any hand jewelry around the high-power ones. No wedding rings, no watches, no nothing. When a glint into the eye could cause serious retinal damage, you don't mess around.

I also don't wear my rings under nitrile gloves at work since I'm afraid of a ring causing a tear.

The odd thing is, in Western culture the origin of gemstones is in the myth of Prometheus. Before cultures from the other sides of the Mediterranean encountered the ancient Greeks, they all used plain rings (often wooden ones, too). This includes old Jews - when Christianity and Islam developed, gemstones were already a common thing.

The Prometheus figure shortly: the demigod Prometheus was chained to a mountain, where a huge vulture pecked his liver off during daytime, and during the night the liver grew back. This was his punishment for sympathizing humankind and bringing fire down to them from the Olympus, against the will of the older gods. To show their gratefulness towards Prometheus, the Greeks wore rings first made of stone to carry their piece of Prometheus' mountain. But a solid stone ring is a heavy bugger indeed, so they soon began to favour planting small stones into bands of wood or metal. (Another explanation for planting precious stones in rings was that it used to be an effective way of smuggling bribes through toll lines between the city-states - rings were considered a most personal piece of property and only prisoners were stripped their rings: thus, a free man could always wear a ring when crossing borders, and hide some valuable property in his palm).

So. As it is apparent that a plain band has no effect on flooziness whatsoever, as men are not floozies if they don't wear their plain bands, the secret must be in the stone. The funny thing being - carrying a stone on a ring symbolizes gratitude towards rebelling against gods. Soooo, rebelling against gods = not being floozy. Obeying God's will (aka not carrying stones - 1 Timothy 2:9-10 "...women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire...") would then result in being floozy. Eh? Of course, it could be that this disturbing paradox is a result of a rather eclectic, or syncretistic, view on the god-kind. But, if our intention is not to stick to single religions but a wider picture on Western culture (which, apparently, has been the main influence on the thinking of the sweet old lady starring in the first post), we will have to accept that. And this does invoke heavy puzzlings of the head unto me.

But, what's best, I am quite sure that elaborately presenting this dilemma when someone expresses one's thoughts on rings and flooziness might prove to be quite an effective way of finishing the conversation!

Logged

Row, row, row thy boat gently down the stream. Oh Charon, hast thou ever know'd that Death is but a dream?"

My mom had a bad metal allergy, and could only rarely wear a ring. I'd have loved to have been a microbe on the wall to hear Mom's reaction if someone had said she looked like a floozy because she wasn't wearing a wedding ring since Mom wasn't exactly known as the Queen of Tact.

Logged

sarahklinkowitz

Well, what happens when your fingers swell up? Like when you are pregnant? I had that happen, and I was practically back to back pregnant for the first four years of my marriage. People need to keep their opinions to theirselves. OP was brilliant in not responding!

irish1

Also, I secretly love the word floozy. It's one of those words that seems so old-fashioned and anachronistic, it makes me laugh.

You'd love the Anna Livia fountain (formerly of O'Connell street, Dublin). Anna Livia is a character in James Joyce's Finnegan's Wake who embodies the river in Dublin. It's a statue of a woman in a fountain, and was popularly called 'the floozy in the jacuzzi' or 'the whore in the sewer' (whore should be pronounced to rhyme with sewer; one of the many great things about the Dublin accent). She was removed to make room for the Millenium Spire (or stiletto in the ghetto) but has found a new home in Dublin.

Well, what happens when your fingers swell up? Like when you are pregnant? I had that happen, and I was practically back to back pregnant for the first four years of my marriage. People need to keep their opinions to theirselves. OP was brilliant in not responding!

I've had to think of this thread a lot lately... I've taken off my rings and put them away safely. Why? I'm pregnant and while they still kinda fit, by the end of the day, my fingers are so swollen, I cannot take them off. So, I'd rather keep them safe than keep taking them off and risk losing them.

My wedding band is a quarter-size smaller than my engagement ring (which, inconveniently, is a quarter-size too big for my finger). Now that I'm really pregnant, my wedding band is too small for my swollen fingers. So I'm a married woman masquerading as engaged, since the engagement ring still fits. Does this make me a half-floozy? And if so, which half of me has floozy-ish tendencies -- the left or right, or top or bottom? Thank goodness I'm not a starfish; trying to work this out in radial symmetry would have me positively boonswoggled!

I wonder if a ring tattoo would substitute for an actual metal in preventing the release of the floozie pheromone. And if it would, would one drawn on with an ink pen work just as well. I would think that both would cover up the "ringless floozie pheromone" gland and prevent future bouts of floozieness, but as far as I know no actual scientific testing has been done on this theory. Maybe we could get a grant.

I think pen ink has metal in it, and I'm pretty sure tattoo ink does also. Just in case, I'd use a pencil -graphite - for extra protection.

If you do the experiment and research, let us know, please.

I wonder if it's the stone or lack thereof, though. I'm thinking that since men's rings don't often have stones, and men are not floozies when they don't wear rings, then it must be the stone. So women who have plain bands must be in trouble.

See-this has items for study I had not thought of. And I would hate to write a grant proposal that was too narrow and did not allow for expansion of the testing. It is clearly an issue of national importance that requires a huge grant for study (I will humbly be willing to take a large salary to oversee the testing and release of the results). I think we, at a minimum, need a huge lab, several bio-chemists and biologists along with their grad students, volunteers to oversee the floozie recovery clinic that we will be creating, and nice glossy brochures explaining our efforts to protect the public from the floozie epidemic and how we are working to curb the bands of men roving about, drawn in by the floozie pheromone. Of course, we will need brave volunteers to allow us to test the floozie gland (either by going ringless or by removing their rings for short periods), along with a cross section of women who have tattooed rings, plastic rings, cigar band rings, and assorted other types of non-metallic rings in order to determine the best way to block the release of the floozie pheromone. We will also need to do some testing to determine if the floozie gland comes online at puberty, or at a later age. Also, at what age do boys start detecting and reacting to the floozie pheromone. Gosh-this could be a lifetime of work (and I need a job right now).

Don't forget that in order to protect the general public, the facility would have to be in a very secure area so even if the test subjects escape, they wouldn't be able to get to populated areas. To make sure they don't even want to escape, the facility should be in a region with a nice climate. You know, like... the Caribbean... the Seychelles... something like that.